1972 (5) TMI 9 - HC - Income Tax

Assessees are purchasers of rubber trees for slaughtertapping; and the single judge, construing the documents of purchase, has held that, under these documents, the purchasers derived no interest in the land and what they derived was only a right to the trees. And in view of that, the learned judge has held that the income derived by the purchasers of the trees from slaughter-tapping was not agricultural income - income from the slaughter-tapping was not agricultural income was correct

Summary

The High Court of Kerala upheld the decision that purchasers of rubber trees for slaughter tapping did not derive agricultural income as they had no interest in the land, only in the trees. The judgment distinguished cases where the owner of land and trees derived income from slaughter tapping. The appeals were dismissed. (Case: C. P. A. Yoosuf v. Income-tax Officer, Kottayam)